Fence Ownership (yes I know It's a tricky one)

Katecooks

My neighbour is demanding I replace the dilapidated fence between our properties (on our right hand side). When we moved in, she told us that our house was built on land that was originally part of her property (she didn't own it at that stage) and that there was a neighbours agreement that the fence would be maintained by the owners of our house. She has no legal documents that confirm this this agreement, so it was presumably verbal. As far as we know the previous owners of our house did repair/replace parts of the fence but the land registry shows a T on her side which would indicate ownership of the boundary is hers. We own and maintain the fence on the other side (left-hand) of our property and all other houses in our road maintain the fence on their left-hand. Any advice? We have a long garden with about 15 fence panels so talking a lot of money.

GrubbyGirl_2

If the T mark is her side then it's clearly her responsibility unless she has some formal documentation that says otherwise, but even then I would still think the land registry would likely trump that. The owner that sold the land for your house to be built on they would have ensured that the new boundaries were correct. Just because the previous owner was daft enough to repair her fence doesn't mean you should.

I'd be tempted to say to her to get her solicitor to write to your solicitor outlining why she thinks it's your responsibility. I think her solicitor will tell her she's talking nonsense.

Brie

Do you want a fence? If not then just take down the one that is in disrepair, assuming it is yours. You might prefer just a hedge or a simple string to mark the property line.

Your neighbour isn't able to dictate what, if anything, is put in its place unless it's hers. I would tell her that according to the documents you have it is her fence and therefore her decision and expense.

subjecttocontract

Even if there is a 'T' Mark on the deeds it doesn't mean you have to erect a fence. You can just put a post at each end and string a line between them to mark the boundary. If the neighbour wants a fence, say, to keep their dog in the garden, they can erect their own fence on their side of the boundary.

TELLIT01

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81977074#Comment_81977074

The only likely exception to that would be if there was anything in the deeds to state the details of any fence which had to be retained/maintained, which is unlikely.

WIAWSNB

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6665688/fence-ownership-yes-i-know-its-a-tricky-one

Hi Kate.

Tsk tsk tsk - what are you like? This is not a tricky one 😉

The facts are;

1. Unless the deeds show 'T' marks on your side AND written text to indicate that this means 'responsibility to maintain a fence', then there is no onus on you to maintain that fence. (And even if it did say this - ie a 'positive' covenant - these usually only apply to the original landowner, and is not automatically transferred.) Realistically, even if the deeds told you to do this, your neighb would be very hard pushed to force you to comply. Of course, in such a case, it would be neighbourly for you to do so. But it ain't the case here.
2. In the absence of (1.), then you simply do not 'need' a fence there at all, unless (a) you want one, or (b) you need to secure wild animals like children within your property.
3. If your houses are terraced or semi, then the exact boundary line should be easy to determine. Anything on your side is yours, and on theirs is theirs. If it straddles, it's usually considered 'party' or shared. It ain't even as simple as that - if you put up a fence on their side of the line, it's still your fence - you own it - but it's 'trespassing', and they can ask you to remove it.

Soooo, what's the situation here? Every other house appears to follow the same convention of maintaining the boundary/fence on their LH side. The deeds seem to imply that is the expectation. Your neighb is an arris.

Why do they think it's different here? Are they at the end of the terrace, perhaps? In which case they may have responsibility for both their fences. If so, tough. 😊

If they go on about 'verbal agreements', then ask them to find this previous neighbour so's they replace their fence…

Section62

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81977133#Comment_81977133

Soooo, what's the situation here? Every other house appears to follow the same convention of maintaining the boundary/fence on their LH side. The deeds seem to imply that is the expectation. Your neighb is an arris.

Why do they think it's different here? Are they at the end of the terrace, perhaps? In which case they may have responsibility for both their fences. If so, tough

"Convention" is meaningless here - left/right there is no 'rule' about ownership/responsibility. Lots of properties on the street being responsible for the left boundary doesn't mean all are.

The "why" above is probably contained in the OP's first post -

our house was built on land that was originally part of her property

- in other words the OP's property is built on land sub-divided from the neighbour's. Which means any "convention" is even less relevant. Responsibility for the boundary depends on what was agreed when the OP's plot was sub-divided from the neighbour's. Some vendors want to pass responsibility for fencing the boundary to the purchaser - which may be where the neighbour has got the idea the OP is responsible. But sometimes vendors want to retain responsibilty so they can dictate the type of fence without having to enforce a covenant, so the neighbour could be wrong.

But regardless of what the Land Registry plan shows (AIUI the 'T' marks aren't definitive), in the OP's position I'd be looking for the original agreement when the land was sub-divided to see exactly what was agreed. IANAL, but my understanding is that the original agreement (subject to any variations) is definitive - Land Registry documents are a record of what was agreed, and are capable of containing errors. What was legally agreed takes precedence.

eddddy

If there was originally covenant to maintain the fence, it would have been a positive covenant. Positive covenants don't "run with the land". So you would not be bound by it.

So you almost certainly don't have an obligation to repair or replace the fence (and your neighbour probably doesn't have an obligation either).

So it's really just a case of "neighbourly relations".

• If you don't replace the fence, you'll save money, but you might have an angry neighbour
• If you do replace the fence, it'll cost you a lot of money, but you'll have a happy neighbour

Or maybe you can look at compromises, like:

• You and your neighbour each pay half
• You replace the fence with a cheaper type of fence… e.g. chain link, mesh, post and rail, etc

Boohoo

Do you have any photos of this dilapidated fencing?

Without seeing the fence I would just put up some string along the boundary attached to Bamboo canes or get some rope and use something sturdier to support the rope and the wildlife will be happy, hedgehog's and the like can use the gardens.

If that's not to your liking put up 900mm chain link fencing as cheaper.

Wooden fencing is expensive something like £100 per post and panel(6×6) and you mentioned 15 needed so string will be cheaper.

Section62

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81977271#Comment_81977271

If there was originally covenant to maintain the fence, it would have been a positive covenant. Positive covenants don't "run with the land". So you would not be bound by it.

Doesn't that depend on the way the covenant is constructed? The default is for positive covenants not to "run with the land", but there are methods of achieving this.

WIAWSNB

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81977171#Comment_81977171

By 'convention' I mean only neighbourly convention. Expectation. Consideration. As performed by 95% of the population.